MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414255030 · doi:10.1029/2025ja033951

Thermospheric Gravity Waves and Ionospheric Disturbances Triggered by Mountain Waves Over the Western US in January 2017

2025· article· en· W4414255030 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erich Becker, Sebastijan Mrak, Sharon L. Vadas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermosphereIonosphereNoonTECGravity waveAltitude (triangle)Gravitational waveWave propagation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyze an episode of strong mountain wave (MW) activity over the western US from 9 to 12 January 2017 using the HIgh Altitude mechanistic General Circulation Model. We find that medium‐scale MWs were generated by strong eastward flow over the Sierra Nevada and the Rocky Mountains. During this time, part of the stratospheric polar vortex jet extended from the western US to eastern Canada such that the MWs propagated into the lower mesosphere where they dissipated from westward vertical wind shear. This resulted in secondary gravity waves (GWs) that propagated into the lower thermosphere where tertiary GWs having concentric ring structures were created. With increasing altitude in the thermosphere, certain propagation directions were highlighted as a result of the dissipation induced by the tidal winds. At 260 km, we find eastward propagation during local morning over the northeastern US, equatorward propagation around local noon over the southern US, westward propagation during local afternoon over the northwestern US, and poleward propagation over Canada after local midnight. In addition, the model shows equatorward propagating larger‐scale GWs over Canada from remote sources around local noon. The simulated regional GW‐mean flow interaction patterns are consistent with multi‐step vertical coupling triggered by the MWs. The traveling ionospheric disturbances (TIDs) during the MW event are simulated with the ionospheric model SAMI3. The simulated GWs and TIDs are consistent with the medium‐to‐large‐scale TIDs observed over the continental US in GPS TEC data.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207